I bet there's a few rather more deserving - and needful - crowdfunding campaigns that people could support.

...and not to help a lunatic murderer.

The brain rot of this country is obscene.

When you raise money for a man who shot another man in the back of the head in cold blood you are celebrating violence.

personnel/contractors, citizens in foreign countries accused of murders etc.? Because people in this country and around the world have raised money for not only the legal defense of people in those groups I mentioned but also raised money to support them knowing their purpose was to do the crimes.

Iran-Contra, Blackwater and others in Iraq, El Salvador death squads, Chilean death squads, funds raised to support the illegal squatters in the West Bank committing crimes, funds raised to defend and support people who torture others? Money raised to support wars and killings by Colonizers of indigenous people?

I'm not disagreeing with your conclusion I am applying it. This country has celebrated violence against people for a very long time. We have a whole movie archive that is filled with "Westerns", that glorified and justified our slaughter of indigenous people, and "War Movies". But is it that the violence of Luigi wasn't "sanctioned" by the government and that administrative blessing is what makes it "OK"?

Or is it OK for some killing as long as we all "like" the reason? These are questions that society doesn't like to deal with. So we don't. The lack of doing so allows us to apply our condemnation as selectively as we choose. This is part of how we have been and still are.

I've always tried to answer the realities of human behavior, as in: People who purposely destroy our environment in order to become wealthy..
...or manufacture items that are profitable but harmful AND shorten the life of the population, fully knowing whats-going-down.
My question is: What's worse? a corporation shortens the life of 10,000 people versus one person who kills one person.
I understand it's a vacuous question but the answer for myself is: I'll be damned if I know. but..I do know that the former people of the corporation
never seem to answer for their crimes.

No matter how heinous one may find these things to be,, Military and government actions are officially sanctioned incidents, That's just the reality of it. And Hollywood? This was a deliberate act of murder, Not some black ops mission nor a Hollywood production. No equivalence at all

People above the law as ruled by a CORRUPT SUPREME COURT MAJORITY.

if he's going to claim back pain caused him to shoot someone in the back when he wasn't insured by UHC, appeared to have recieved treatment, and his beef seems to be with doctors who couldn't reverse nerve pain from an injury.

Maybe he'll get some sympathy from jurors, but not as much if he had a personal story to tell of denial of treatment.

They waited in the cold for hours for the public seats. One called it a "grave injustice". Others gave him a "thumbs up" as he left. Most wore masks too
There are women professing their love for him all over social media
If e was fat & "ugly" a lot of his support wouldnt be there
What a ridiculous world

and I don't think he, personally, needs any help. Lots of other uninsured people do, though.

as someone who has chronic illness (rheumatoid arthritis), and ups & downs with UHC - the company in question. But I will not support someone financially who comes from a family of his wealth. His parents have plenty of money to help him with his legal and/or psych issues.

I did give to a go-fund-me this week, though. There is a guy back home, friend from high school, who has a kid with medical bills right now. It is a family crisis for them, and they don't have the funds for what they are dealing with out of the blue. I don't even know if they have health insurance, but I think they probably do from employment, because they were only asking for $2500. That is more likely time off work to deal with healing, co-pays, back & forth for doctor's visits, etc. I gave what I could afford because I know they are hurting.

... He just picked UHC as an opportunistic target.

There is quite a bit about his own health issues, and while he may not have specifically targeted an insurer he had a beef with, he clearly saw how the industry functions.

But all that aside, I do know that when I'm considering contributing to a go-fund-me, it is not going to be one posted by such a wealthy family. Or, rather, on behalf a wealthy family. Who knows who even posted it ...

Don't they have the highest rate of deny and delay?

It may have small monthly payments on a sliding scale. That is from the Clinton Administration it is the only thing to come from His and Hillary's health insurance push in the 1990s.

to give a $1 donation, if that amount is possible, using a pre-paid gift card and do so under the name of a GQP member of Congress.

That another is killed believing their family can raise money. It's not logical but may happen.

Would not be at all surprised when there are others being inspired by him to do the same thing

I'm in no way celebrating what he did.

However, one common ground in the good ole USA, most people hate dealing with their insurance carrier.

It is the one service we pay for and have to fight to get.

Will a CEO's fear of getting shot in cold blood, change their greed driven business practices? Who knows.

fucking disgusting

in January 6 as far as I am concerned.

All his lawyers got funded by peons too.

The copycats will be rampant